Full support for solo play while allowing up to 12 players.Play against the computer (PvE) or vs other human players (PvP).Easy to impossible difficulty settings. Interest for both newbies and for hardcore pro micro players.Pre-start mode in which you can look at allied and enemy units, strategize and pre-give initial unit orders.Play your own-made bank scenarios with friends as if it was any built-in scenario.

Scenario Creation Features :

Create new scenarios alone or with your friends.Access to campaign units, heroes, structures, mineral fields, health packs and more!Set units to appear and researches to apply for a specific range of difficulty.Many researches can reach lv99. So you can gain the Zergling's speed boost or the weapon research up to 99 times!Pick any part of 256x256 terrain you want for your scenario!Test scenario mode to easily test your scenario.Store up to 30 scenarios in your bank file.Ultimately send your bank file to me to get your scenarios permanently added into the map for everyone else to enjoy!

This post will include some of the things that need to be adjusted with future patches. I know Ricky has a giant list somewhere of other stuff but I thought I'd keep a list here for when I play with pubbies:

f2 issuesThe following units are not a part of f2:PygalisksSentry botsScourges

Very low priorityPlayers should have victory when they leave the game, not defeat

Known issues that probably won't be fixed soonRaynor Hero's snipe ability is not designed for multiple raynors and the red line aiming animation will tend to go from the bottom right Raynor regardless of player alignment

Hyperion fires from inside vortex

Last edited by Krazy on Thu May 29, 2014 2:21 am, edited 4 times in total.

Future Ideas for Micro and Tactics 1.5-Record-keeping (how many scenarios played, scenarios where you have beaten impossible-S, etc.)-'Campaign Mode' - Player groups get 10 lives, and have to beat 10 particular scenarios on Easy/Normal/Hard difficulty sequentially. Based on number of players, so 10 2 player scenarios, 10 3 player scenarios, etc..-'Tournament Mode' - Two selected teams play 5 different scenarios for 'tournament cup'-Organization of scenarios based on intended number of players (so you don't run into 2 player scenarios when you have 3)-Researches to control the AI difficulty used by computer players

Last edited by Krazy on Thu May 29, 2014 3:25 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Unusual cases:Reaching the tanks: Too easy if you kill the depots, too hard if you don'tBarrels!!!: extremely difficult with 4 people, perfect in solo at 4Academy's Dodging Test: in all scenarios this scenario is dependent on surviving the first 2 seconds and after that has no change in difficulty

Currently Broken: Mutalisk and PoisonThe Long Run: AI attacks neutral or goes crazy

So when I say we should work on a 'campaign mode' what I really mean is we need to find a better way to organize PvE scenarios to introduce the map to players. Right now there's only two scenarios with 3+ players that feel 'right' to me in terms of being consistent in difficulty on hard: "Desperate Dinner Cooking" and "Covering Mother". Several of the "too easy" ones are very close, but in any case there's only about 10 pve scenarios that support 3+ players at all. This means that in a 3 player game we go to PvP very quickly. Which is more or less fine, but if that's going to be the case the game should not load PvE bank files from players before going to PvP (although perhaps this is just a glitch from me saving above save slot 30)

Although honestly maybe I should just be starting players on PvP immediately?

Due to the server switch by Lavachu, some of my newest posts got lost so ill just summarize what I posted real quick :

DifficultyI don't intend to fine tune the difficulty of each scenario since it's too relative from player to player. Random pubs could have trouble with normal or hard difficulty while a better player such as Mesk often could easily attempt ImpossibleC or better scenarios.

On top of it, as I hardcode scenarios from other players, difficulty is likely to go more whack as any scenario author would have their own ideas of difficulty.

Honestly, Hard difficulty itself is essentially a joke considering the existence of Elite, Master, ImpossibleC, ImpossibleB, ImpossibleA and ImpossibleS difficulties. I mostly consider it as a "Harder than Normal" difficulty in my mind.

PvE or PvP as defaultHard to say since PvE is friendlier but more "boring" as opposed to PvP that have more odds for the player to ragequit due to not winning their first times.

For now, I am sticking PvE scenarios showing first until I truly make up my mind.

Added a 4 players game mode to help fill lobbies easier.Player units are now automatically selected when choosing a scenario.Added top-left info which shows the number of players and if it's a PvE or PvP scenario.Army Select : Hyperion, Scourges, Broodlings, Pygalisks and Sentry Bots and some others are now included in Army Select.Sentries now have Hallucination for the "NukeMirror" PvP scenario.Ultralisks now have 50% life on Elite and later difficulties of the "Brood Leader Defiance" PvE scenario.New research : Mag Mine - Quicker Launch to set Mag Mines to launch faster than 2.5 seconds.The HotS version of the Hyperion no longer shoot while being in a Mothership's Vortex.Zurzan now have cooldown on his primal zerg unit summons.

- Editor - Unit section : The current team setup is now shown for much less confusion with new players.- The top of the out-of-bounds terrain is better covered in black.- Doodads should no longer show if they are completely out-of-bounds of a scenario's terrain.- Changelings no longer prevent a team's defeat.- Wraith's Tomahawk Power Cells (+100 max energy) can be set up to level 99 instead of 1 (thus up to +9900 max).- Two new preset terrain coordinates for relatively flat scenarios.- Added Overmind and Overmind Tentril under the "Other Stuff to Sort and/or Fix" unit list.

Although by the big number, it's pretty much every map that don't horribly suck or has at least some real redeeming aspect.

Meanwhile :

Here is a brief review of how the judging is going to take place:

1) Blizzard will review the complete list of entries and narrow it down to the semi-finalists 2) We will issue a Call to Action to have you play and vote on the final five 3) A panel of Blizzard judges will decide on first, second, and third place winners

However, many heavy-weight and medium-weight popularity-established maps such as Star Battle, Bunker Wars X, Hungry Hungry Arena, Magecraft and so many are present.

Realistically, it's pretty much the farthest my map will honestly go for this contest. Odds are players would just try a few new ones that does honestly interest them but ultimately vote for their favorite ultra-popular map. That and/or authors of popular maps will pull many of their main players into voting a much-needed advance over most maps.

I am not saying that I am automatically defeated but it would clearly require one heck of a miracle.

Still, I am a bit curious to see if some newer maps will have actually some spots or if the popular maps will just eat all of them alive.

Anyway, I do want to thank Krazy for his support into making the map's terrain and much needed starting PvP scenarios for it.

I also want to thank our clan LLDN for the testing of my map, especially finding unexpected gamebreaking bugs.

Ill eventually be unlazy and actually update + hardcode new scenarios ... especially Krazy's newer PvP scenarios that probably start to pile up in the 30+.

Of course they'd go with the perpetual snowball kind of contest instead of one that required staff to actually do anything... well, don't feel too bad about not giving in to making the exact same everything everyone else made since RoC. The very fact you made it on that list without being an AoS/Castlefight clone to begin with is a miracle.

Remember that some of the 'final' contestants may have their own issues as well... Star Battle clearly is designed for 12 players and 3v3 is extremely silly. Maybe there is some hope, however slim

Hard to say since that aspect would have been really mattered as a total disqualifier but they ended up being qualified. After that, the only thing that matters for them is if they took a big popularity hit for being 3v3 only in terms of 1st to 5th place or not.

IskatuMesk wrote:Of course they'd go with the perpetual snowball kind of contest instead of one that required staff to actually do anything... well, don't feel too bad about not giving in to making the exact same everything everyone else made since RoC. The very fact you made it on that list without being an AoS/Castlefight clone to begin with is a miracle.

At the very least, I am happy that they had a big list of maps in which they "accepted anything" (up to a point) if only to showcase the efforts of the many mapmakers that they deserve at least a real mention down the road.

Although due to the above, it might be less of a miracle since I saw some maps that I felt "too basic" or unlikely to gain real interest. My map would technically blow them out of the water but they are listed anyway.